Paul Louden wrote:
> That means less useful features should be considered critically even
> if they have small binsize costs, just because they're useful to only
> an exceptionally small group. They're a dilution of the total
> "usefulness density."

Let me chime in with my $0.02. I think that the binsize isn't *that*
important for the battery life. If a feature adds 10Kbytes to the
binary, it means 10Kbytes less buffering memory. That is hardly
measurable at all, only a few frames of an MP3 file.

Yes, the binary size would matter if Rockbox would grow out of control,
but we all know that won't happen.

I also tend to get the feeling that the binary size card gets played a
little too often. Especially when it comes to GUI features, or "eye candy".

Linus
Received on 2008-10-29